Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    February 9, 2014 9:00pm-9:31pm PST

9:00 pm
they change their mind during the road, this condition is not enforcable by us, and by us and it is not even enforcable by you, and and you have to turn it over to the alu to bring it to the abc and i just wanted to be clear about that. >> if they want to stay open until 2:00 in the morning, monday through sunday that would be fine at this point. we can explain it because of the security measures and the, the good neighbor policy. but the security measures that they put in place, both and mr. escoloero's place of business and also at the green cross down the street. the green cross is also offered to step forward and help him with any security problems. >> that is great. thank you. >> if there is any other
9:01 pm
commissioner questions or comments? >> i do. >> and commissioner campagnoli? >> yeah. >> sergeant, i have a question, regarding, what is your recommendation for the hours and days and hours of entertainment. >> and whatever. >> whatever limitations may apply to. >> and right now, based on his good faith, execution. and all of the requests that have been placed and all of the recommendations in the police department and i have ever confidence that he will manage a good business no matter what hours he requests that i would only ask to conform to the limitations by the abc. >> in other words, and if we are okay with that. >> it is 7 nights a week and two nights a week. >> i think that would be
9:02 pm
accessible and we will run more into the problems of maintaining the staff that many nights a week and that is on the business owner any more. all right. >> commissioner hyde? do you have something? anyone on this side? >> any other questions? if not, we can open it up for public comment, unless you want to come to speak. >> good evening commissioners, with the alu, and i wanted to clarify commissioner joseph's concerns in regard to the conditioning of the hours, and yes, it can be done and it can be done by the abc and what the recommendations of the san francisco police department, for by protest, and in this particular matter, when the transfer happened, once again, like we spoke last night at the last meeting we had no problem with the new ownership taking over that they will conduct the better service than the previous owner. and in regard to this matter and, we saw no need to add any
9:03 pm
emergency conditioning because, like i said, we didn't want to interfere, or defeat the progress of any new owners and have them fail before they start and there are many ways to add the emergencying conditioning and at this point the alu is not speaking to do so. thank you. >> so, so, they are permitted until 2:00 a.m.? >> they are operating conditions at this time but yes, 2 a.m. is closing time. >> okay. >> great. >> thank you so much. >> and let's open it up for public comment, is there any public comment on this issue? >> for this permit? >> good evening mie, name is patricia and my husband and i own the two buildings right next door to the bar, i want to thank the two commissioners who came, we, i know that i speak for the other people who are not here u the neighbors, and that was the most productive
9:04 pm
meeting we have ever had, the most encouragement that we have ever had in all of the years that we have tried to work with the people and so thank you thank you, very much. and i one of the things that you did not mention was a plus was the fact that they we have a phone number, and they are required to have an english speaking person in the bar so that if a call is made for excess noise, that someone who speaks english will be there. i am very concerned about meeting the other owner whoever it may be that is english speaking. and i certainly want to work with these people. because we are in the business as well and we don't want people to fail. one of my concerns is right now when i walk into this room is the previous owner's of the bar are here in the room. so i am curious to... and i don't know if i can ask them or what the story is. i can't ask them so that is a concern for me. why are they here and are they still connected to the bar? so, i thank you again, for your time. >> thank you. >> is there any other public
9:05 pm
comment? >> i do see one person. >> state your name. >> my name is mike (inaudible) and i was the prior owner of the place and since we sold the place, we have been teaching them and training them, that to have a neighborhood policy, because we started having some confrontations with some of the neighbors, which finally we work with the inspector that the inspector we worked wither close to them and we invest like $15,000 in insulating the walls which is really any good effects because even right next
9:06 pm
door, and next to the bar, and any significant noises, reduced and he even went to the other property, and to check if the noise was and the noise was completely reduced. so basically it satisfies in terms of the noise and everything that it was, and or suggested by the commissioners. but, now, i think that it, and we have a three places writ now, and in the same block, the places that we have in the same block and they have security guards and they are in charge of cleaning the place, and this is really clean, as much as we can. and i do it myself. and because it is still a neighbor and i have a office right there. and i think that mr. escoloero is doing a great job of cleaning the place and even if he does not do it because he
9:07 pm
did not shop so early and we are doing it in the rest of the people in the block because we are trying to work it out with the neighbors. and we are really concerned, and that anything that is happened because now i know longer owner, i am now a neighbor. and that i am really would like to have a peace, and you know, no noise. and so, i am here to say that the investment that was made before, plus, the effort that he is making, and so that the noise is no longer any problem. besides, it is a great plan and so that is why i am here. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> any other public comment? >> seeing none, public comment is now closed. commissioners? >> i have a question for staff, and looking at the application, the applicant is to just address the neighbor's concerns, and the applicant is
9:08 pm
jose escoloero, the people that have control over the premises and, is he bottom it says that the name and the address of the process of service, and the meetings and the owner and name and the address of the owner. and conception silva is the owner, is mr. escoloero not the owner? >> there are two i believe. >> no that is the landlord. >> of the building owner? >> yes. >> okay. so, jose is the owner, and romero estrata is who? >> he is the co-owner. >> and who is jose rodrequez? >> you are? >> yes. >> and so, who is jose rodriguez?
9:09 pm
and maria estrata is who? >> the wife of the co-owner? >> it seems that he lives with you and it has the same address and the same middle initial. and so i guess what is your last name? rodriguez or escoloero. >> he is jose, escoloero and rodriguez jose is another, >> it is him. >> it is him. >> 3158, 24th street number six. >> that is one of his nephews.
9:10 pm
they have the same name. >> and they live together? >> yes. >> okay. >> and maria estrata is the wife, sister relative of ramera. >> she just helps them out. >> she is related to him? >> at the same address? >> >> she is one of the workers. >> she related to the other man? >> no, she is not related. >> she is not related. >> okay. they live at the same address. >> maria lives at 177 lilac street..., no? >> no. sorry. >> confidential information. >> i am sorry. >> they live at the same address, that is why i am confused. >> they are siblings. >> they are siblings. >> yeah. >> brother and sister.
9:11 pm
>> so, just for your neighbor's sake, is this the total amount of people who own your place? >> no. it is just two of them. it is jose and then, romero. >> okay, thank you very much. >> i believe that is... sorry. >> i am sorry. >> so let's entertain a motion. >> i would like to entertain a motion. >> yeah. >> i am going to have the entertaining the motion, and so the motion that i would like to make is approve this permit, and i would like to strike number 2, since we do not have... i would like to strike number 5, because it is covered by, number 8, and strike number 6 because it is covered by, number, eleven and strike number 7, because it is covered by 7 in the good neighbor policy. and 8 is covered by ten and
9:12 pm
three in the good neighbor policy. and 10 is covered by, number 5 and so i would like to strike all of those and i would like to add the condition in number 1 1 to be kept up to 30 days. and strike the last sentence that says that the electronic surveillance will be made available to the police department upon request. and strike number 12. >> number 12 is strike. >> it is struck. >> so, and then, 2, i realize that things have been better sound-wise, recently but they not not been having live entertain sxment this is a mixed neighborhood and so i would like the limit the hours of entertainment to 11:30 on week nights and 12:30 on weekends to be reviewed in a year, if things go well.
9:13 pm
>> friendly amendment? >> yeah. >> so, everyone get all of those >> okay. >> could i do a friendly amendment? >> we need a second first? >> no. >> second. >> go ahead. >> i was wondering if you would include in there like the english speaking person answers the phone as part of the condition? >> so i don't think that that is actually something that i would entertain. i believe that what i think is that the people who are working there, should be able to understand enough english that when someone calls and says that it is too loud, what they are to do. but i think to put those sort of it is a little insensitive, but i think that certainly staff will be able to understand complaints when they come to the phone and however they reach that agreement will be fine as long as the
9:14 pm
neighbors are not getting people who cannot respond. because that is would be breaking the good neighbor policy. >> for the purpose of discussion and when i talked to the security guard do you speak english? and he said no, i then, he walked around with me and i turned around and asked him a question and he understood me and responded in english and i said that i thought that you didn't speak english and so i think that there is a level of fear among this group of folks that that is a protective shell that they don't understand. so i agree with you totally on what you just said for sure. >> i have a question. >> so it is 11:30 on the week nights, >> correct. >> and that is sunday or monday? >> i would go with sunday. >> sunday, through... >> through thursday. >> and just friday and saturday, going to 12:30 a.m.. >> correct. >> for a year.
9:15 pm
>> for a year. and then, i think that it will be fine to review it again. but i think that you know, it should really, have a time to kind of work itself out. >> sure. >> was dl a second? >> any other discussion, commissioner lee? >> i mean, that i, i mean the weekday thing that i am okay with, i mean, 12:30, i mean that it is kind of taking, you know a big, you know, a pro-active role, but i mean that i am thinking that we just supported what the permit officers said and maybe we review it in six months. and if there is still, and if there are complaints then, we can go to the extreme of 12:30. i just think that he is entitled to at least give it a shot. , you know? and support the permit officers request or recommendation, but it is, we can review it in six months and then it comes up again, we can go ahead and
9:16 pm
recondition it to 1:00 and i think that 12:30 is the extreme. >> i don't know if anyone feels similarly, if not, we can take it to a vote and one other potential compromise is that we could shorten and go with the hours that it feels too extreme from a year down to six months. >> i would shorten it to six months but i would like to stick with those hours and i will tell you why. after the meeting, i was encouraged myself to limit the hours of operation of entertainment to eleven and 12 for six months. but because of what has gone on here and the responsibility of it and i felt that we would be able to give them leeway and i would also shorten that to 6 months to review that.
9:17 pm
>> all right, so you have to revise, his motion, or can we just... >> can someone else make a friendly amendment to his motion? >> i will, okay, someone other do that? >> yes. so, i will make the friendly amendment that it is, that it will be from 11, or until 11:30 sunday through thursday evenings. and until 12:30 on friday and saturday. for 6 months. and then it will come back, does it come here for a review? >> yes. >> okay. >> and then it will be accepted and does the accept that? >> great. >> and let's take this to a vote. >> okay, this is the motion is to approve with the police conditions striking 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 10, and 12. one and 12 were already struck by the station and to limit entertainment times to end at 11 p.m., and sundays through
9:18 pm
thursday. >> and 11:30 p.m. sunday through thursday and 12:30 a.m. friday and saturday to be reviewed in six months. >> and yeah, as well as number eleven. the last sentence. >> yeah. >> the last sentence of eleven. >> and triking the last sentence and making it... >> yeah, right. >> thank you. >> all right. and also, i would just want to say that the green cross has agreed to help them do more community out reach and has really taken an interest in helping them out and so i do feel confident that they will do more community out reach. >> great. >> and all right, on that motion, commissioner perez. >> aye. >> commissioner akers? >> aye. >> commissioner hyde? >> commissioner joseph. >> aye. >> lee. >> yes. >> campagnoli. >> aye. >> and president tan. >> aye >> so moved. >> all right. >> the motion passes. >> good luck, and we will move on to item 8, commissioner
9:19 pm
comments and questions. >> commissioner hyde and then commissioner joseph? >> i just wanted to say that this morning i found out that stew smith who was a local..., i don't know, like, and i am not sure an activist but he did the drag show at which was a public access tv show and i was able to appear on it twice and he was someone who started out not understanding drag queens and then went as far as promoting them and working with them and really becoming a very vibrant person in the community who ran for dccc several times and he will be missed by the community. >> and in addition, he did a lot of work with people with disabilities he was a great guy, there is no question about it. >> yeah. >> and for me, february 24th,
9:20 pm
castro theater, the nighty awards, san francisco night life awards. bye a ticket and come. and so that is what i have to say to everybody in this room and everybody listening in tv land, it is a great show honoring our industry. and i expect, everyone to be there. and you can go to and it is to buy a ticket or you can go to the event. it benefits sight and sound which is a 501 c3 california non-profit and whose mission it is to promote and support music and the arts and the creation of their content. and i am done. >> all right. >> any other commissioner comments or questions? >> and let's take public comment on the commissioner comments and questions, seeing
9:21 pm
none, we will move on to the last item which is new business requests for future agenda items. >> anything? if not, >> to adjourn. >> this meeting is adjourned. thank you. >> ♪
9:22 pm
♪ ♪ >> this is smack in the middle of the tenderloin neighborhood where there are 50,000 people within walking distance. you see the kids that are using what's provided, but there is so much opportunity for this to be a stronger, more welcoming, healthier cleaner safer place for the people of this community to play. there are going to be new green areas, a full-size basketball court, outdoor fitness equipment, community garden, a brand-new clubhouse. it's going to be a much more welcoming spot for a neighborhood that really needs it. ♪ ♪
9:23 pm
9:24 pm
>> good morning, everyone, and welcome to the thursday february 6, 2014 meeting of the board of supervisors, neighborhood services and safety committee, my name is david campos and i am the chair of the committee and we are joined today by committee member, supervisor norman yee and eric mar is in route, and the clerk is eric evans and we want to thank sfgtv staff for recovering the meeting today, jim smith and jennifer love, do we have any announcements? >> be sure to silence all cell
9:25 pm
phones and device and complete the speaker cards and documents to be included should be submitted to the clerk, items acted upon today will be on the board of agenda. >> did you want to call another item first as well? or starting with the first one? >> yes. >> item one, is a hearing to considerhearing to consider that the premises-to-premises transfer of a type 21 off-sale general license and a type 42 on-sale beer and wine public premises license from 1301 van ness avenue to the same address (district 2), to liz zaninovich for beverages & more, inc., dba bevmo!, will serve the public convenience or necessity of the city and county of san francisco. . >> great, thank you. >> i know that we have here supervisor weiner, to speak on this item, supervisor do you want to speak now or wait until the presentations? >> i am here for the... >> oh, for the parks, okay. >> i think that it is item five. >> okay. >> you know, can we go back, i
9:26 pm
am sorry. could we call item five first? >>ordinance amending the police code to require applicants for commercial parking permits to provide the residential zip code, gender, and duration of employment for employees and other individuals working in privately owned parking lots or parking garages. >> great, and we have been joined by committee vice chair, supervisor eric mar, and so on this item that has been introduced by supervisor weiner, co-sponsor by cohen and so supervisor weiner? >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you for taking this item out of order so i appreciate it. colleagues, this legislation is basic and straight forward and intended to provide us with a better understanding of how the private parking lot industry operates. the legislation was considered last week, by the small
9:27 pm
business commission and the commission voted unanimously to recommend its approval. first, i want to be very clear that most parking lot operators are good actor and provide a very necessary and valuable service to residents and visitors, with that said, as we have seen over the years, there are a few not so good actors who have taken advantage of the fluid nature of the parking business, which puts these operators, and puts the operators that actually abide by the rules at a competitive disadvantage. a few years ago, recognizing that private parking lots have a heightened impact on their neighbors and the general public, the board of supervisors have legislation requiring a police department permit to better insure the public safety is being advanced in enacting that legislation, the board recognized the special and unique nature of this industry. the legislation before us today for the committee today, builds
9:28 pm
on this recognition, and will help the city prioritize enforcement efforts. we want to be sure that there is a level playing field for all parking lot operators and that the interest of the public and the employees are being supportive. currently, parking lot operators are required to get an annual permit from the police department. all operators and agents are required to submit detailed information including information required for background checks. the existing permit process requires that all employees be listed and reported to the police department annually and that is the current law. my legislation would require that operators also provide some basic aggregated data on their employees to be clear the legislation in terms of demo graphic information will not be identifiable to particular people and it will be arrogated and this includes the tenure of employment, dem graphics
9:29 pm
including gender and primary residence, specifically zip code and the purpose of this additional information is as follows. in terms of tenure, we have heard a concern that some private parking lot operators are excessively turning over employees with a goal of not allowing employees to gain tenure in their position, and guaranteeing short term employment that no one is ever able to increase on the pay scale. >> we of course of the city want to make sure that the people are able to build career and care for their families and remain in the city and have a livable wage and so the requirement for reporting tenure information will help us understand if there is a problem with parking lot operators churning through employees with a goal of not allowing any of them to
9:30 pm
increase in terms of wage tenure. there are in he terms of demographics this is just information to make sure that we understand that the industry is and that there are issues around the demographics of the workforce and to make sure that we have a diverse workforce including around gender and then primary residence, although we are not attempting to impose the hire on these parking lot operators we are, or do have a public interest in knowing, whether san franciscans are being hired into these jobs. colleagues this information will help us better understand. it will provide us with an additional tool to provide enforcement efforts and the legislation and the reporting requirements will not be a administrative burden given that the operators are currently required to give detailed reports annually and the information that we are asking for is easily obtainable from any pa


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on